Posted by MikeT23 on 1/17/2013 8:28:00 PM (view original):I'm telling you the NE passing game, pre-2007, was just above league average. You can give credit/lay blame to whoever you want.

HAHAHA!!! So, it's now Brady vs whole other teams.

We are talking QB's here.

As much as jtard is a moron, he's right on the button with you. You just argue and argue with zero end point and absolutely zero reasoning behind it.

I've already explained this. If you're too stupid to read and retain, I can't help you.

QB is a unique position. There is one on the field at any time. Pre-2007, NE's passing game, with the might Brady taking all the snaps, was just above league average. Brady's legacy was built on winning games not NE's wonderful passing game. That's how it works with the QB. He wins games, puts up great stats or both. Pre-2007, Brady was not putting up great stats.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/17/2013 8:28:00 PM (view original):I'm telling you the NE passing game, pre-2007, was just above league average. You can give credit/lay blame to whoever you want.

HAHAHA!!! So, it's now Brady vs whole other teams.

We are talking QB's here.

As much as jtard is a moron, he's right on the button with you. You just argue and argue with zero end point and absolutely zero reasoning behind it.

I've already explained this. If you're too stupid to read and retain, I can't help you.

QB is a unique position. There is one on the field at any time. Pre-2007, NE's passing game, with the might Brady taking all the snaps, was just above league average. Brady's legacy was built on winning games not NE's wonderful passing game. That's how it works with the QB. He wins games, puts up great stats or both. Pre-2007, Brady was not putting up great stats.

I've agreed that his legacy was more on the fact he won games and Superbowls....but he was better than league average. His stats don't lie.

You can't compare Brady to Cincy's whole QB stats. We are comparing QB's. Stop saying NE Pre-2007 now. It has always been Brady vs other QB's in his era. Facts show that he's been above league average and in some years ranked higher than the almighty Manning (Pre 2007).

I see the point Mike is making if you're looking at counting stats like yards and touchdowns.

Team A: QB1 produces at league average for 5 games, gets hurt, QB2 finishes out the season at league average.
Team B: QB3 produces at league average for the entire season

Team A and Team B are equivalent passing teams, but QB3 is going to put up bigger numbers, not because he played better, but because he played more. He's also going to wind up well above the league average for all QBs in the counting stats, because only so many QBs get through a full 16 game season, either due to injury or poor performance.

Still haven't told me how Brady was carried for 3 Super Bowl wins. His o-line was poor to average for his first 2 wins. Even worse than I thought. Or do you just want to ignore pre-2007?

I'll address it.

In 2001, Brady had the help of an amazing defense (without them AND some cheating they would have gotten DESTROYED by an obviously superior Rams team in the SB). During the regular season they were ranked 6th in points allowed.

The talented and versitile Troy Brown was by far the leading receiver on the team. His ability to do many things well helped that team in ways that are often far under valued. He was the safety valve Brady had at that time (and he's ALWAYS had at least one safety valve receiver, most recently Welker and even now the TEs).

If your argument for Brady being carried is Troy Brown, you should probably move on. What other things did he do on offense that made him so versatile? He wasn't running wildcat, throwing halfback passes, etc. He ran routes and caught the football.

Posted by AlCheez on 1/18/2013 9:22:00 AM (view original):I see the point Mike is making if you're looking at counting stats like yards and touchdowns.

Team A: QB1 produces at league average for 5 games, gets hurt, QB2 finishes out the season at league average.
Team B: QB3 produces at league average for the entire season

Team A and Team B are equivalent passing teams, but QB3 is going to put up bigger numbers, not because he played better, but because he played more. He's also going to wind up well above the league average for all QBs in the counting stats, because only so many QBs get through a full 16 game season, either due to injury or poor performance.

Facts are....Brady is well above the average QB Pre-2007. Not his fault that some QB's got banged up. I mean, you could say the same for all the QB's that played the whole season. That they weren't as good because other were injured...blah blah blah.

Mike, if we're going to compare passing in a team sense, I'll argue that yes, Brady had above average statistics while the rest of his weapons, combined, were in the bottom 10 from 2001-2006 as far as talent is concerned.

If we're comparing Brady's numbers to teams, with the argument of some teams not starting the same quarterback all year, I'll list the QBs that didn't make at least 14 starts in 2006, for example, since that's the year we've been talking about, because Brady's stats are most similar to the numbers you gave earlier.

Tony Romo
Donovan Mcnabb

The 2 QBs above are the only ones that you can reasonably say could have put up better numbers than Brady. Here are the rest that started at least half their teams' games:

Posted by AlCheez on 1/18/2013 9:22:00 AM (view original):I see the point Mike is making if you're looking at counting stats like yards and touchdowns.

Team A: QB1 produces at league average for 5 games, gets hurt, QB2 finishes out the season at league average.
Team B: QB3 produces at league average for the entire season

Team A and Team B are equivalent passing teams, but QB3 is going to put up bigger numbers, not because he played better, but because he played more. He's also going to wind up well above the league average for all QBs in the counting stats, because only so many QBs get through a full 16 game season, either due to injury or poor performance.

Facts are....Brady is well above the average QB Pre-2007. Not his fault that some QB's got banged up. I mean, you could say the same for all the QB's that played the whole season. That they weren't as good because other were injured...blah blah blah.

My point is that you let Mike frame the debate around total throwing yards and touchdowns, which was mistake #1. Now that you're heading down that path, if you define league average as the median of all QBs who played that year, or even, let's say 16th-17th in the league since there are 32 teams, you're going to be setting a really low bar, because the guys who wind up at league average in those categories are typically just the worst quarterbacks who managed to play the whole year. You want to tell me that Alex Smith was a league average QB in 2006? Of course not, and there are plenty of other stats which tell you he wasn't - which are the stats you should be arguing for Brady.

Brown was a much better weapon than most people ever gave him credit for. In fact, I would argue that many people under rated Brown as much as they over rated Brady.

By the way, I think the continuous under rating of the players around Brady is part of the reason why people over rate Brady himself. This is one example of that.

If your argument for Brady being carried is Troy Brown, you should probably move on.

This is what I'm talking about. You under rate Brown as much as you over rate Brady.

Brown's stats don't lie in that 2001 season. He caught a great deal of the passes from Brady and served as his safety valve, a role that is played by Welker and the TEs now. That role is CRUCIAL for Brady, because if he didn't have the outlet receiver, he'd be far worse than he is now (and as I've said, what he is now is over rated).

If you could somehow take away Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Gronk and Hernandez, Brown, and other safety valve receivers who were clearly above the rest of the receivers on the team in terms of talent (look at the stats if you doubt Brown was clearly the safety valve - he led the team in receptions by FAR) - if you take those players away, Brady would have had a lot of trouble and would not have won nearly the games he has.

And let's face it, the main reason he's over rated is the team winning games and in particular decade-old SB wins. All of those things are a function of playing on a talented team, and most QBs get more credit than they deserve for team wins. Brady is certainly no exception.

Honestly, if he had played for say, the Cleveland Browns behind their patchwork offensive line, he'd have struggled mightily and probably would have been out of the league by 2005. Instead he had a great system with talented players and a much better than patchwork offensive line to block for him.

Brown was a much better weapon than most people ever gave him credit for. (He was versatile in the fact that he returned kicks, played defense, etc. He was a pretty good receiver. He was not a burner, but had pretty good hands and did a good job of finding ways to get open.) In fact, I would argue that many people under rated Brown as much as they over rated Brady. (Even if you say Brown was underrated, he isn't an elite receiver. You said that Brady was carried by his offense, and one good receiver on his 1st of 3 championship teams doesn't mean he's carried.)

By the way, I think the continuous under rating of the players around Brady is part of the reason why people over rate Brady himself. This is one example of that. (You stated one guy who may have been underrated.)

If your argument for Brady being carried is Troy Brown, you should probably move on.

This is what I'm talking about. You under rate Brown as much as you over rate Brady. (You said this already.)

Brown's stats don't lie in that 2001 season. (Brown's don't, but Brady's do. OK.) He caught a great deal of the passes from Brady and served as his safety valve, a role that is played by Welker and the TEs now. (You don't know the definition of safety valve. It's the pass you make, generally to a RB, when you can't find anyone open downfield and you need to get rid of the ball. Brown was Brady's go to guy in 2001.) That role is CRUCIAL for Brady, because if he didn't have the outlet receiver, he'd be far worse than he is now (argument doesn't apply, as Brown wasn't his safety valve. If anything over his career, this player is Kevin Faulk.)

If you could somehow take away Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Gronk and Hernandez, Brown, and other safety valve receivers who were clearly above the rest of the receivers on the team in terms of talent (look at the stats if you doubt Brown was clearly the safety valve - he led the team in receptions by FAR) - if you take those players away, Brady would have had a lot of trouble and would not have won nearly the games he has. (Yes, if you take away Moss, Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, he wouldn't put up elite numbers like he has been, he'd probably put up closer numbers to 2001-2006. Again, learn what "safety valve" means.)

And let's face it, the main reason he's over rated is the team winning games and in particular decade-old SB wins. (QB is a large part of winning games.) All of those things are a function of playing on a talented team (Troy Brown makes the offense talented, right?), and most QBs get more credit than they deserve for team wins (I disagree, as they're the most important player on the field. Teams who win games generally have good QBs) Brady is certainly no exception.

Honestly, if he had played for say, the Cleveland Browns behind their patchwork offensive line, he'd have struggled mightily and probably would have been out of the league by 2005. (He won 2 Super Bowls with poor-to-average offensive lines, and it's been discussed that he's great at getting rid of the ball when under pressure) Instead he had a great system (I thought you said BB was overrated too) with talented players (not as talented as other teams with great QBs pre-2007) and a much better than patchwork offensive line to block for him.

I'm using the stats categories you gave me. If you're just giving me stats that are simply convenient for your argument, so be it, I'll make my argument around your stats.

The argument in my last post was regarding other quarterbacks who didn't have the opportunity, because of injury, shittiness, whatever, to accumulate the stats that Brady did that year. The point is when you look at the players, you realize that it would have been unlikely the vast majority of those players would have done it had they played 14+ games.

As I said, you brought up "weapons". To me, that means the passing game of the team because, as we know, the QB doesn't throw the ball to himself. I could argue that not being on the field due to injury, shittiness, whatever is comparable to a "weapon". As opportunity is a "weapon".

The simple fact of the matter is that, for Brady's first 5-6 years, he led a slightly above league average passing attack. Congrats?